You can download the zip file right click windows can open it.Than open the files in v19.2.I don't see a way to open red files

Logged

Even a mistake may turn out to be the one thing necessary to a worthwhile achievement Henry FordIf I have ever made any valuable discoveries it has been owing more to patient attention than to any other talent Isaac NewtonI have not failed Ive just found 10,000 ways that won't work Thomas Edison

I tried to make the first step of your tutorial, but with right click on the material, the Redsdk Editor is grey.

1. download attachment "Tutorial_render scene with RedSDK.zip" and unzip this file2. in the directory you must have 5 files - one .tcw and four .red ( not leave the file. tcw from this folder )3. open the file "Tutorial_render_with_RedSDK.tcw" in TurboCAD v19 or v204. now you have in "materials palette" -> in category Tutorial_render_RedSDK four materials Red( you can also select for example the door -> right mouse click over the materials palette and select -> Find Material of Selection )5. now you can edit/modify .red materials

MajoThanks for taking the time to making these tutorials quite beneficial.

much appreciated

w.d.

« Last Edit: March 30, 2013, 10:51:19 AM by wd »

Logged

Even a mistake may turn out to be the one thing necessary to a worthwhile achievement Henry FordIf I have ever made any valuable discoveries it has been owing more to patient attention than to any other talent Isaac NewtonI have not failed Ive just found 10,000 ways that won't work Thomas Edison

I have prepared a tutorial (for TC Platinum v19 only) and ePack file describing a procedure. I hope that helps.If you would like to answer for some questions. If I know ...

Majo

Hi Majo,

Thanks for the tutorial. A good cabinet should not stand idle. It is perfect for storing a variety of items. I could not resist and decided to try a glass, self-recursion and other interesting effects 

This is the closest to a rendering benchmark discussion as I have found on this forum (because two people said how long it took), so I opened the file in TCPro Platinum 21 and saved it as a JPG on my system to see what I'd get.

I verified that the RedSDK settings were identical, selected View_1 (which is slightly different from what Majo posted) and got the following in 291 seconds.

Oh, yeah... the time is for rendering to the saved file (which was specified to be the same dimensions as the one Majo posted), not the generation of the render in the window (I used a small window to minimize that rendering time, which is not included in the total).

I built this computer just over two years ago and it's been great for the work I do. Multi-threading is such a blessing. Do you remember the days when it was nearly impossible to stop a rendering you had started in TC without closing down the program? The 64-bit version has put an end to "out of memory" errors as well.

I have a new system (i7-5820K with 16GB and a GTX 970). Haven't played around with Overclocking, yet, so this is a 'stock' system.

With the same settings (View_1, Quality Rendering, Global Illumination Fine setting and an 805 x 768 image size), my new time is 81 seconds to create a JPG.

When I set Advanced Mode with Global Illumination Fine Tone HDR, it saved in 59 seconds.

I should point out that I received a warning that the RedSDK drivers have not been modified for the GTX 970 video card (it's too new), so a 'generic' driver was used, so performance may increase in the future.

****** Added Text ******Did a bit of math and noticed that the vastly improved graphics card didn't contribute that much to my improved timing. The decrease in processing time, if only due to the increase in the number of cores over my original system (12 cores vs 4 cores, both @ 3.3 GHz), would have resulted in 97 seconds.

My actual time of 81 seconds is a further 16% reduction, but at a cost of 229% over the original graphics card. On the other hand, my new processor was actually cheaper than the one it replaced.

CORRECTION: I have since noticed that TurboCAD Pro Platinum V21 does not make significant use of hyperthreading, with most of the rendering taking place in 1 of the 12 processor cores. As my new cpu has the same clock speed as my previous system's cpu, that means the ~3.6x improvement in rendering speed is due entirely to my graphics card.

I too ran the tutorial in TC 2015, to explore whether or not I should upgrade my system. I didn't make any changes to the materials, just loaded the drawing, adjusted the view, and used Red SDK Advanced Render, Quality, Global Illumination Fine Tone HDR. My on screen resolution is 1920 x 1080, render time was 67 seconds. If I saved to 805 x 768 JPEG, the time was 19 seconds. This was the total time going from wireframe to Advanced Render. How can that be? I didn't think my 2 year old system would result in those times. I monitored my CPU and verified that all 8 threads were at 100%. The GPU load top out at 80% during the ray tracing sequence. One thing I noticed is that when using Quality Render, Global Ill. Fine, my time was about the same. During this render, TC reports 8 threads. The same thing happens in Adv. Render, Global Ill. Fine Tone HDR, but TC reports 2048 threads(!?). I tried doing the same with Anti Aliasing set midway to 4x. It didn't seem to affect the times in Quality Render, but wouldnot render with Advanced Render. Bottom line is I'll stay with what I have. I don't do much in the way of rendering anyway.

To get consistent times, I am only counting the time to save to JPEG (805x768 @ 100% quality setting). Rendering to a full-screen window on a 1920x1200 screen takes a bit longer (43 seconds), but everybody can run different window sizes (my video card supports Ultra HD, just at a slower frame rate), so that is not a good basis for comparison.

I think your advantage is that your video card (GTX 660) is well-supported by RedSDK. My GTX 970 may not be completely supported, yet. The 2048 threads you saw listed are probably the CUDA cores in your graphics card (I see the same number).

Jeff, I think I was mistakenly comparing my times in TC 2015 to your times in TC v21. But I see your times improved greatly with and upgrade to TC 2015. This is probably due to the use of Hyper Threading and an improved Red SDK engine. Now I realize that a difference of 34 seconds for this tutorial may not seem like a big deal, but a 50% reduction in render times for large drawings will be a significant improvement. I imagine those who have render times in the hours may have a different view on upgrading their systems. Later, as time permits, I will run the tutorial with TC v20 Plat to compare times with TC 2015 on my PC. This should verify what you stated about TC v21 to TC 2015.

The results are different than I expected. Earlier, it seemed apparent that 2017 made the leap to using the CPU under Quality renders and the GPU when choosing the Advanced renders, but observation of the CPU and GPU did not reveal any differences, and the render times were identical for the same type of render.

As before, I am only counting the time to save to JPEG (805x768 @ 100% quality setting) so that we can all get comparable timing.

Sure seems odd that 2015 provided results slightly more than half the time (33 seconds instead of 60 in 2017). I wonder what the explanation for this is (did I make a mistake?).

I did two 8000 x 8000 renders and there is one significant difference in the result (attached are miniaturized detail shots). The GI Fine image took 17,061 seconds while the GI Standard took 2,277 seconds.

The GI Standard image is darker than the GI Fine. What explains this?

I don't see any other significant differences, other than the 87% reduction in processing time.

RedSDK should really be used with the "Live" tone mapping controls which are only available in the Advanced Render Styles. I never use the Quality render styles for final renders as we have no control over the render once it's complete.

RedSDK should really be used with the "Live" tone mapping controls which are only available in the Advanced Render Styles. I never use the Quality render styles for final renders as we have no control over the render once it's complete.

Daz, or Majowhy does the wood material appear blurry in Majo's (a little) redsdkk render and especially Jeff's. I mean, I see this often in redsk, there's like a "haze" of something. I become more aware of it when I use and compare it to lightworks. I understand that you really can't compare the two render engines, just wondering if you see it as well and that it's standard in redsdk. Redstuff is high quality,especially with metals and glass but I can't shake that 'hazy feeling"

I don't have the same size monitor, so I rendered a smaller image on screen and then Save(d) As to PNG (with the larger resolution specified in Setup) to get the resolution that John R generated. I can imagine that, if he had saved to the resolution that Majo used in his original images (800x800), he would have been done in a very few seconds.

John is the first with a Quadro card to post a benchmark here, but it's enough to make me consider one for my next system build.